Jordan's help. Wow.

[QUOTE=ShaqTwizzle]

Oh and Pippen had 25 / 7 / 5 on 59%TS in that G3 so obviously [B][COLOR="Red"]he was still the biggest reason they won that game.[/COLOR][/B]

[/quote]

Dude... you have no idea what happened in that game and are talking out of your ASS.

The Bulls lost a 20 point lead in the 4th quarter and were on life support before Kukoc saved them (if you had clicked on the youtube link I posted earlier, you would've seen Ernie Johnson describe the [url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c7SbG-8Bvgk&t=0m10s]entire situation in detail[/url]).

Here's Pippen's last possession before deciding to SIT OUT the final possession, in his greatest choke ever (of many):


[IMG]https://media.giphy.com/media/TmnwWY6ALWeUo/giphy.gif[/IMG]



[quote=ShaqTwizzle]

So saying they were at best a 2nd round exit is disingenuous and completely untrue certainly for that specific year if not others

[/QUOTE]
Just like you claim the Bulls could've won, I can claim the Bulls were a Kukoc walk-off away from being swept..

Regardless, they were a 2nd Round team - that's how good they were - they weren't going to rebound from their 2nd Round defeat and win the championship next year - they were PERMANENTLY A 2ND ROUND TEAM (or worse) without MJ, after being a 3-peat dynasty with him.. If we were measuring that gap with our arms, how big would it be.

Otoh, 2014 Miami Heat were not a 3-peat dynasty - they played far worse than anyone the Spurs faced in the playoffs (Mavs, Blazers, OKC), and were actually beat worse than any team EVER... No one who watched the colossal embarrassment in the Finals thought the Heat could beat any of those Western Conference teams.

At the time of their record defeat in the Finals, they were a 1st or 2nd Round Western Conference playoff team, at best.. Then Lebron left...

That's a lot different then the Bulls actually WINNING the 3-peat with everyone still in their prime and therefore actually BEING a 3-peat caliber team......... and then falling to permanent 2nd Round status (or worse) when MJ retired.
.

[QUOTE=3ball]
The Bulls lost a 25 point lead in the 2nd half and were on life support before Kukoc saved them.
[/QUOTE]

And how did they build that lead?
I judge a players performance by how he played from start to finish not just how he did in the final few seconds.

[B]Pippen had 25 / 7 / 5 on 59%TS[/B] in that G3.
[B][COLOR="DarkRed"]Kukoc had 8 / 4 / 4 on 46%TS[/COLOR][/B] in that G3.

If you really think Kukoc deserves even half the credit that Pippen deserves for that victory then you're insane.

[quote=Yao Ming's Foot]

My guess would be an average of his stats against similarly defensive efficient teams he faced in the playoffs.

MJ vs 97 Heat Def Rtg: 100.6

MJ vs 93 Knicks Def Rtg: 99.7

[/QUOTE]
[I][COLOR="Navy"]If your simple logic regarding DRtg was valid, then inferior players to Jordan (Melo, Kobe, Bonzi) wouldn't shoot between 48-61% against the Spurs' 99.6 defense - they'd shoot the same 39-40% that Jordan shot against the similarly-rated defenses you listed above..

Analyzing DRtg properly is far more complicated - here's a few examples of how complicated it is..[/COLOR][/I]

For starters, your DRtg's are from the regular season - [COLOR="darkred"]in the playoffs, the Knicks DRtg was an abysmal 107.0[/COLOR].. In the ACTUAL SERIES (the 1993 ECF) it was 112.4... It was horrific.. Jordan has many series where he shot much better against defenses that gave up far fewer points per possession... See how complicated it is??... No one who watched the 1993 ECF would say the Knicks played weak defense - but according to your erroneous use of DRtg, their defense was garbage.

Also, look at the 1989 and 1990 Pistons defense - they had some of the best defensive personnel ever, and played extraordinary team defense.. So why aren't their DRtg's as good as many crappier defensive teams in the 90's or 2000's??... It's because STYLE OF PLAY in any given era affects DRtg's.. In this case, offensive rebounding rate is the key factor - it was higher in the Pistons' era because teams didn't shoot 3-pointers - the higher proportion of 2-pointers increased offensive rebounding rate and consequently ORtg/DRtg as well.. This is statistical fact - previous eras had MUCH higher offensive rebounding rate due to the higher proportion of 2-pointers, which increased ORtg's and DRtg's for all teams.

Btw, in addition to higher offensive rebounding rate, I have a less-provable theory why DRtg's were higher: when teams get hot from midrange, THERE IS NO DEFENSE THAT CAN STOP THAT... It's not like 3-pointers, where you can get a hand in the face and drastically reduce the efficiency - good midrange shooters are accustomed to having defender draped all over... So in previous eras, when teams LIVED off midrange, they could get hot and be unstoppable.. I think that happened a lot in previous eras, like the aforementioned Bulls-Knicks series in 1993, where both teams had high ORtg/DRtg, even though it was a tough, grind-it-out defensive series... Just look at Game 4 - MJ scored 54 points ON ALL JUMPSHOTS, mostly midrange.. This isn't an exaggerration.. [I]This shows that when guys or teams get hot from midrange, DRtg goes out the window because there is no defense that can stop it.[/I]

And again, the simplest way that you're misusing DRtg is that you're conflating regular season DRtg's with playoff DRtg's.. Playoff basketball is much different, and the Spurs DRtg in the 2007 playoffs was 103.1... Whereas the 1998 Utah Jazz had a playoff DRtg of 100.4 - this is a lower playoff DRtg than anything Lebron has ever faced in the Finals.
.

Amazing to watch 3ball when he's on a roll, owning 4 posters at the same time.

Tbf some of these comments (by bankei, roundrock and etx) are embarrassingly easy to counter. These kids don't seem to know what they're talking about and are just handing out ammunition with every mess-up.

Still, credit to 3ball (as annoying as he is) for picking apart every ridiculous post that's been coming by these kids.

[QUOTE=3ball]Kukoc won the game single-handedly at the end!!!.. They don't win without Kukoc miracle shot!!!!
[/QUOTE]

Such idiotic logic... and you know better.

Let us imagine that Jordan scores 50pts in some random playoff game and gives his team a big lead after 3 quarters but then he plays poorly in the 4th, the opposing team makes it close and Steve Kerr ends up hitting a gamewinner at the very end after playing like crap the whole game.
Does Kerr become the the MVP of that game...?

Pippen had a great overall game and made a bone headed play at the end.
Kukoc had a shitty overall game and made a great play at the end.

Kukoc prior to his last shot had put up 5pts / 4ast on 39%TS.
Maybe if "Kukoc the savior" hadn't played so horribly and below his usual standards during regulation they wouldn't have even needed a gamewinner eh?

[QUOTE=ShaqTwizzle]

Let us imagine that Jordan scores 50pts in some random playoff game and gives his team a big lead after 3 quarters but then he plays poorly in the 4th, the opposing team makes it close and Steve Kerr ends up hitting a gamewinner at the very end after playing like crap the whole game.
[B][COLOR="Red"]Does Kerr become the the MVP of that game...?[/COLOR][/B]

[/QUOTE]
Depends if MJ sits out the final possession in an epic choke, thus failing his responsibility as team leader.. If he fails his responsibility as team leader and Kerr saves him (like Kukoc did Pippen), then Kerr gets credit for the win.

But thank goodness for Kukoc's miracle - otherwise, Pippen's choke and subsequent sweep would be a massive stain on his career that he doesn't recover from.. Actually, a Bulls' sweep gets Pippen traded almost certainly, given his disprespectful blunder.. Kukoc saved that ***** from getting traded.. :confusedshrug:

[QUOTE=3ball]Cartwright and Paxson had the same minutes and production in 1993... Cartwright averaged 5.6 ppg in 19 minutes in both 1993 and 1994...

Paxson averaged 4.2 ppg in 17 minutes in 1993, which declined to 2.6 ppg and 13 minutes in 1994.. This isn't making any difference on that team, especially considering the Bulls replaced Paxson with Kerr, who averaged a career-high 8.6 ppg.

As for Scott Williams - he averaged 5.6 ppg in 1993, which was replaced by Wennington's 7.1 ppg.[/quote]

Look at the games played by those players in '93 and '94 dumbass. They drastically decreased.

[B]Cartwright[/B] - played 63 games in '93, only 41 in '94.
[B]Paxson[/B] - played 59 games in '93, only 27 in '94.

Those two players were done. Cartwright was on bad knees. And Kerr and Wennington aren't replacing Paxson and Cartwright's 3peat experience.

[quote]This is an utter LIE.

Kukoc averaged 11/4/3 in 24 minutes and was the Bulls biggest clutch player - he hit all 4 game-winners for the Bulls in 1994 season, including the walk-off winner that prevented the Bulls from going down 0-3 to the Knicks in 1994 ECSF.[/quote]

Kukoc struggled with his shooting all season and his defense was non-existent. A couple of fluke shots isn't going to change that fact. And his minutes and production decreased across the board in the playoffs. He was hardly any kind of consistent replacement needed to replace Jordan.

[quote]Can you read??.. I said the 1994 Bulls were a 2nd Round team without MJ, and they weren't going to rebound and win the championship next yeearr either - they were PERMANENTLY A 2ND ROUND TEAM (or worse) without MJ, after being a 3-peat dynasty with him.. If we were measuring that gap with our arms, how big would it be.[/quote]

No shit they were a 2nd round team jackass. They had 7 new faces on the team with barely any playoff experience in their first year of learning the triangle. And the team no longer had a 1-2 punch. It was a single perimeter superstar team which usually don't go far. Just the year before the Bulls WITH their 3peat team intact BARELY beat the Knicks in the '93 ECF. Lucky for them they had a 1-2 punch. When Jordan was building a brickhouse shooting 3-17 in must-win Game 3 it was Pippen scoring 29 points picking up the slack. When Jordan was building another brickhouse in Game 6 shooting 8-25 and barely scoring a goddamn thing in the 2nd half it was Pippen closing out the Knicks to avoid Game 7 at MSG and propelling the Bulls to the '93 Finals. In '94 Pippen didn't have that same luxury of having another player in his prime beside him that could score 20+ points, play all-world defense, rebound and be a playmaker.

[QUOTE=hitmanyr2k]

[B]Cartwright[/B] - played 63 games in '93, only 41 in '94.
[B]Paxson[/B] - played 59 games in '93, only 27 in '94.

[/quote]
lol at thinking guys who average literally 2 ppg and 4ppg make a difference..

and again, BOTH guys were replaced with better players who produced much more.


[QUOTE=hitmanyr2k]

No shit they were a 2nd round team jackass. They had 7 new faces on the team with barely any playoff experience in their first year of learning the triangle.

[/QUOTE]
The Bulls were essentially the same team in 1994 - all the players were the same, except several significant IMPROVEMENTS of various marginal role players...

i.e. Kerr and his career-high 8.6 ppg replaced Paxson and his 4 ppg.. Longley and his 8 ppg replaced Cartwright's 6 ppg.. Wennington and his 8 ppg replaced Scott Williams and his 5 ppg..

And the Bulls added Kukoc, who averaged 11/4/3 in 24 minutes and was their best clutch player.

LOL at you for thinking that the Bulls were a different team just because a few bench players were replaced by BETTER players - every Bulls championship teams had similar, [I]immaterial[/I] turnover..



[QUOTE=hitmanyr2k]

When Jordan was building a brickhouse shooting 3-17 in must-win Game 3 it was Pippen scoring 29 points picking up the slack. When Jordan was building another brickhouse in Game 6 shooting 8-25 and barely scoring a goddamn thing in the 2nd half it was Pippen closing out the Knicks to avoid Game 7 at MSG and propelling the Bulls to the '93 Finals.

[/QUOTE]

[SIZE="3"][I]You're saying Pippen's contribution compared to MJ's??.... :yaohappy:

Jordan scored at least 10 ppg more than Pippen in EVERY playoffs series, except two, when he averaged 5 ppg and 8 ppg more.

In addition to scoring literally 50-400% more than Pippen in substantially every playoff series, Jordan assisted on a higher proportion of teammate field goals - he led the team in assist %:[/I][/SIZE]


[B]Assist Percentage 1991-1993 Playoffs:[/B]

Jordan: 31.1%
Pippen: 23.3%

[url]http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/j/jordami01.html#1991-1993-sum:playoffs_advanced[/url]
[url]http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/p/pippesc01.html#1991-1993-sum:playoffs_advanced[/url]


[B]Assist Percentage 1996-1998 Playoffs:[/B]

Jordan: 22.3%
Pippen: 22.0%

[url]http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/j/jordami01.html#1996-1998-sum:playoffs_advanced[/url]
[url]http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/p/pippesc01.html#1996-1998-sum:playoffs_advanced[/url]


[SIZE="3"][I]So MJ scored 50-400% more than Pippen, while leading the team in passing and playing GOAT defense... MJ carried the biggest load of all time.. No one else is close[/I][/SIZE]

.
[SIZE="5"]Btw, this was the consensus about Pippen:[/SIZE]



[B]Shaquille O'Neal:[/B]
[INDENT][I]"You did okay, but MJ did most of the work"

"Remember I WAS BATMAN YOU WAS ROBIN , I was PUFFY YOU WAS MASE"

"See what happens when Michael Jordan ain't protecting you, you lose a 17 pt lead in the fourth quarter." (referring to 2000 WCF Game 7) [/I][/INDENT]



[B]Bill Laimbeer[/B]:

[INDENT]"[I]We didn't even think about Scottie Pippen. It was Michael Jordan and the Jordannaires - and you can't win championships like that with only 1 player[/I]."

[url]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xqC74bv46Z8&t=1h07m33s[/url][/INDENT]



[B]JERRY KRAUSE, Bulls GM:[/B]

[indent][I]

[QUOTE=Roundball_Rock]The league was less diluted then so each roster was stronger in absolute terms.



Pippen was not a permanent starter (he started in the playoffs in 88'* but reverted to the bench the next year) until 1/3 the way through the 89' season. Moreover, Pippen missed 9 games altogether then. The Bulls went 47-35 overall that year. Without Pippen they were 4-5 (a 36 win pace). More revealingly, they went 24-11 when Pippen played 35+ minutes. I don't remember their exact record in the 56 games he started but it was markedly better than when he was on the bench. Chicago started that season 13-12--after Pippen became a starter they went on a big winning streak.

Maybe all of the above is just coincidental, though. :oldlol:

*The first round was best of 5 back then. Pippen started for the first time, had a huge game. Without that the Bulls would have lost in the first round for the fourth consecutive year.



:applause:

MJ stans conveniently always neglect this. The Bulls nearly won the #1 seed replacing MJ with a D-Leaguer. Imagine if they had been able to get a legitimate SG. The Bulls had the worst starting SG in the league and still were contenders. What does that say?

The Heat replaced LeBron with Deng, an above average SF who was a former all-star. Look at how much they declined in 2015. Now imagine the Heat replacing LeBron with a D-League SF because all the free agents had been signed by October.



The Bulls actually outscored the Knicks during the series. The Knick wins came by 1, 4, 5, and 10. One of them featured a phantom foul on the final play, gifting the Knicks Game 5 and a 3-2 series lead. Everyone other than MJ stans agree that was one of the worst calls of all-time.

Moreover, it is incredibly stupid to look at one year's performance and assume that same level of performance would exist in every other year. There is always some variation in yearly performance. In the 90's the top East teams outside the Bulls were the Knicks, Cavs, Magic, and Pacers. All of these teams had ups and downs.

If the Bulls had the entire 90's without MJ they would have almost certainly had years where they would have advanced further than the second round. They were on par with the Knicks in 94' by every metric. Look at the 1992-1997 Knicks' variance: ECSF, ECF, Finals, ECSF. According to 3ball, because they made the ECSF in 92' they could not improve in future years because teams always achieve the same outcomes.[/QUOTE]

THIS!

:applause: :applause: :applause:

The REALITY was, the '93-94 Bulls had to scramble to replace Jordan...with the legendary Pete Myers.

Furthermore, Pippen and Grant missed a combined 22 games that season. Think about that...they went 55-27 with their two best players (and no MJ) missing 22 games. Had those two been relatively healthy, and they surely would have won 60+ games.

Which would have been HUGE. Why? Because the Knicks finished 56-26, and the Rockets went 58-24.

And this nonsense that the '94 Bulls were an ordinary second round team????? As RR posted above, they outscored the Knicks in the ECSF's. Furthermore, they went 3-0 at HOME in that series. Had they had HCA (which they surely would have had Pippen and Grant not missed 22 games), they would have beaten NY in the ECSF's. And given the fact that they wiped out the Pacers during the regular season, 4-1, there is very little doubt that they would have beaten them in the ECF's.

As it was, the Knicks beat the Pacers in the ECF's, and advanced to the Finals...where they lost a game seven to the 58-24 Rockets by four points, and in a series in which they outscored Houston.

Again, had Pippen and Grant not missed a ton of games, they likely would have been in the Finals, and perhaps even won the title. So much for a mere SECOND ROUND Team theory.

BUT, it gets even worse for the Jordanites.

Why? Because Grant jumped ship prior to the '94-95 season, and really was not replaced.

So, here was Pippen SINGLE-HANDEDLY carrying the '95 Bulls to a 34-31 record. Again, WITH Grant in '94, they went a deceptive 55-27 (easily a 60+ win team.)

Again, the SAME EXACT roster that went 55-27 withOUT Jordan...except with Jordan replacing Grant.

So, MJ returned to play the last 17 games of '95. Rusty? In his 5th game back, he scored 55 points. In the last game of the regular season he hung 33 points in 45 minutes. If anything, he was the HEALTHIEST player going into the post-season in the entire NBA.

And before someone gets excited about Chicago's 13-4 record in those last 17 games, keep in mind that the '94 Bulls played at what would have been a 12-5 pace in 17 games (and fully healthy, probably a 13-4 pace.)

Oh, and in the playoffs, Jordan's numbers were nearly identical to those of his '93 title run. So, in effect, he played nearly the same as his '93 post-season.

BUT, the Bulls WERE an ORDINARY second round team. They were bounced 4-2, by a 57-25 Orlando team. The same Magic team that would get swept by the 47-35 Rockets in the Finals. The '95 Bulls post-season was a SHELL of the '94 Bulls post-season.

Oh, and BTW, guess who the MAIN COG in beating MJ's '95 Bulls in the ECSF's?

How about this..."The MVP of the '95 ECSF's"...

[url]http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=357166[/url]

(thanks to Jlip BTW.)

An 18-11 .647 FG% series in which he was arguably the best player in the entire series.

Of course, GRANT always always came up HUGE in his post-seasons. Just look up his OTrgs in his prime post-season career.


Ok, so now the Bulls ownership realized that even with MJ, they had no chance of winning a title...without a dominant PF (like GRANT.) So, they went out and signed HOFer Dennis Rodman.

Here was MJ basically replacing Grant, on a 55-27 team (realistically a 60+ win team BTW)...and then ADDING a HOF PF to it! Is it any wonder why the '96-98 Bulls were able to overcome Jordan's poor shooting in those Finals to win three more titles????

BTW, there were articles proclaiming Rodman as a FMVP in '96...

[url]http://www.nytimes.com/1996/06/08/sports/nba-finals-once-again-rodman-is-most-valuable-bull.html[/url]


And Pippen as FMVP in '98...

[url]http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1998-06-11/sports/9806110398_1_scottie-pippen-bulls-karl-malone[/url]


And let's get real here, too.

The 90's were a watered down era. Most teams were lucky to have TWO great players, and many had less. The '90's Bulls never faced teams of the caliber of the '80's Celtics and Lakers, nor the early 80's Sixers. And they were 0-3 against the Bad Boys at their peak. It wasn't until the Pistons crumbled (and with Grant and Pippen coming up HUGE) that they finally beat the Bad Boys. And please, don't give me the '91 Lakers. They were a SHELL of their 80's selves. Even the brilliance of Magic came as he was on the downside of his career.

And how about this?

Since we saw what the 90's Bulls did without Jordan...going 55-27 and a STRONG title contender...

let's remove the best player from every other team in the 90's, as well. Guys like Hakeem, Barkley, Malone, Ewing, Miller, Robinson, et al.

How many rings do the Jordan-less Bulls win the in the 90's, if every team is missing their best player? Probably at least six.

I've never seen a thread with this bad of an OP start on ISH, where the content of the OP's original post argues the complete opposite/so much against what he is actually trying to argue for. :facepalm

[QUOTE=BIZARRO]I've never seen a thread with this bad of an OP start on ISH, where the content of the OP's original post argues the complete opposite/so much against what he is actually trying to argue for. :facepalm[/QUOTE]

His point is very valid.

MJ had a TON of help in his six rings (and again, in the watered down 90's.)

SOME "Jordanites" argue that he had POOR surrounding talent.

Well, when he ACTUALLY did, his teams went nowhere and were a win away from being swept in the first round three straight times. The man did not walk on water.

It wasn't until he had 55+ win supporting casts (and then ADDED Rodman to them) that he started winning his rings.

[QUOTE=LAZERUSS]His point is very valid.

MJ had a TON of help in his six rings (and again, in the watered down 90's.)

SOME "Jordanites" argue that he had POOR surrounding talent.

Well, when he ACTUALLY did, his teams went nowhere and were a win away from being swept in the first round three straight times. The man did not walk on water.

It wasn't until he had 55+ win supporting casts (and then ADDED Rodman to them) that he started winning his rings.[/QUOTE]


You should change your post to "he had help winning a TON of rings".

And that loaded comment about the walk on water. He DID in those series. You know as well as I do they played one of the truly great teams in the 86 (and 87 Celts (before injuries hit them later in the playoffs) and a 59 win Bucks team.



And nope. You could do this with ANY player who's had success with a who they played with over their career, and they'd come off a hell of a lot more impressive than Mike's cast.

I watched almost every game of Mike's career. He CARRIED that s*** regularly. And other than Rodman, he MADE those players what they were.

And quite frankly if Kukoc, BJ, and an ancient Harper are the players near the top of your list in a 14 year career, then GTFO.

Just shows how Mike did more with less than anyone.

[B]When the playoffs came, his stats go way up. No coincidence. Because it was money time. Time to carry the team. And that's his playoff stats went up. Because when the going got tough. Mike upped it, when hardly ANYONE else on the team did.[/B]


Listen bro, I love your Wilt posts. And I have Wilt as the greatest center ever. But Mike played with crap relative to other great players.

But what separates Mike from others is he stayed and turned crap into something that was functional. [B]AND he turned it up like NO ONE EVER DID [/B]when it mattered in the playoffs.

[QUOTE=3ball]Kukoc won the game single-handedly at the end!!!.. They don't win without Kukoc miracle shot!!!!

According to Phil Jackson, Pippen [url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c7SbG-8Bvgk&t=2m49s]asked out[/url] of the last play and sat on the bench.

[I][COLOR="Navy"]Interestingly, if Pippen had gotten his way and been allowed to brick the Final shot, the Bulls get swept!!!...
[/COLOR][/I]
And the sweep was the Bulls' true capability - that's what was supposed to happen, but the Kukoc shot gave the Bulls 2nd life and adrenalized the team.[/QUOTE]
They really wasn't a 2nd round team. There first round opponent was filled with injures.

[QUOTE=BIZARRO]You should change your post to "he had help winning a TON of rings".

And that loaded comment about the walk on water. He DID in those series. You know as well as I do they played one of the truly great teams in the 86 (and 87 Celts (before injuries hit them later in the playoffs) and a 59 win Bucks team.



And nope. You could do this with ANY player who's had success with a who they played with over their career, and they'd come off a hell of a lot more impressive than Mike's cast.

I watched almost every game of Mike's career. He CARRIED that s*** regularly. And other than Rodman, he MADE those players what they were.

And quite frankly if Kukoc, BJ, and an ancient Harper are the players near the top of your list in a 14 year career, then GTFO.

Just shows how Mike did more with less than anyone.

[B]When the playoffs came, his stats go way up. No coincidence. Because it was money time. Time to carry the team. And that's his playoff stats went up. Because when the going got tough. Mike upped it, when hardly ANYONE else on the team did.[/B]


Listen bro, I love your Wilt posts. And I have Wilt as the greatest center ever. But Mike played with crap relative to other great players.

But what separates Mike from others is he stayed and turned crap into something that was functional. [B]AND he turned it up like NO ONE EVER DID [/B]when it mattered in the playoffs.[/QUOTE]

First of all...

CONTEXT.

Again, the '94 Bulls were an example of the quality of teams in the 90's. Basically without their best player, and with their two remaining stars missing a combined 22 games... a 55-27 record, and realistically a title contender.

The watered down 90's consisted of 60 win teams with maybe two stars. Unlike the 80's, which had STACKED rosters of 3-4- and even 5 HOFers.

And Jordan had his share of flawed performances. He was basically outplayed by Mongrief in their '85 H2H. He choked big time in the clinching game three of the '86 series against the Celtics. In their '87 rematch, against a crumbling Celtic team, he shot .417, which included a 9-35 performance in the clinching (and sweeping) loss. In the '89 ECF's, he QUIT on his team in a game five of a series that was tied 2-2, and ultimately a 4-2 loss.

Oh, and his numbers DECLINED considerably against the Bad Boys from '88 thru '90. And his teammates overcame shooting of .455, .427, and ,415 in his last three Finals.

No one is arguing against his place in NBA history. He is a Top-5 GOAT, and has a case for the GOAT.

BUT, the point of the OP was that, yes, he had a TON of help along the way.